It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
And of course at some point they could just straight up redo past movies.
I absolutely do not want that to happen, but in today's Hollywood, films get remade after ten years, let alone 50.
like how Moonraker is remake of the spy who loved me and A view to a Kill is a remake of Goldfiner
They didn't need to though. The first ten minutes of Daylights, yes; after that it's totally original. They've shown that they're perfectly capable of writing stuff without Fleming, the question of 'what will they do when they exhaust Fleming' is answered by 'the same thing they've been doing for forty years'.
That's a bit of a stretch regarding GoldenEye, I think it's probably more coincidence than anything. Bond stories aren't hugely original or diverse themselves so they do tend to repeat naturally. A bit like how LTK plays very much like an adaptation of TMWTGG but apparently the writers didn't intend that: they thought they were doing Yojimbo. But really 'spy goes undercover in an organisation to bring it down' isn't a massively unique concept.
You’re right, they didn’t need too, but I think after how excessive TSWLM and MR were, it was probably for the best to try and incorporate some element of Fleming.
Regarding Goldeneye, maybe I’m reading too much into it, but I’ve found Trevelyns motivation similar to that of Drax’s from the book. But that’s about it, kind of Barebones really.
They have never needed to rely solely on a Fleming novel since 1969, right the way through to 2005 with CR. What we have had in-between is scenes and short stories adapted to fit a wider original script.
At the end of the day, adding these Fleming moments is paying lip service to the hardcore Fleming fanbase like myself. Most casual moviegoers will be none the wiser for it. But its enough to keep us Fleming die-hards happy.
"The target is London."
To settle an old score dating from WWII. Not to mention the veiny patchwork of facial scarring over half his face that looks pretty much exactly like Drax's as described in the book.
My additional thought is it's just a matter of time before the Fleming novels are filmed and updated without reservations the way Casino Royale was in 2006. Tempus fugit.
Part of me resists the idea of reusing Fleming titles and books that have already been adapted largely faithfully, while part of me is rather intrigued.
If was to accept “remakes” of Bond films, then it’d only be Moonraker, and the Blofeld Trilogy. Because I think Moonraker never got the proper respect it deserved, and I’m disappointed in the handling of the Blofeld trilogy, mainly down to it being filmed out of order (TB is okay, YOLT is okay, OHMSS is amazing.) Everything else? I’m good.
I also recognize those are films made 41 or even 53 years in the past.
I'd add TMWTGG to the Blofeld trilogy, as this directly continues on from where YOLT left off, and puts an end to the saga.
And let's not forget Trevelyan's burned face.